Which company receives the deposit?

Every 'AI trading bot' offer hides one question: which company actually holds the money? A bot is software, and software is not a company. The table above shows the active, non-bank companies that the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas lists as virtual asset service providers. Use it to put the pitch's money trail next to the regulator's list.

Active non-bank companies on the central bank's list

The company's name as the Bangko Sentral lists it, any brand name beside it, and the list's date.

What the columns show

The table above has four columns. The first is the company's name exactly as the central bank wrote it in its list. The second is the brand name the list gives for it, if any; some companies operate under a different trading name. The third is its status in the list, which here is always active because this slice shows only active entries. The fourth is a link to the original entry in the central bank's directory.

A row records what the source published, not a finding of ours. The table is a snapshot read once a week from the Bangko Sentral's list of virtual asset service providers. The date shown is the 'as of' date for the whole file, not the day a company was licensed. Always confirm on the central bank's own page.

What this slice leaves out

This slice shows only companies marked active and that are not banks. The central bank's list also contains bank entries and inactive entries, but those are not shown here. A bank that offers virtual asset services is regulated differently, and an inactive entry means the company's status has changed or lapsed. If a name you are looking for is not in the table, it may still be on the full list as a bank or an inactive entry.

Absence from this table is not a statement that a company is unlawful or safe. It means only that the name is not in this particular slice. The reader should check the central bank's own page for the complete list, because this site does not claim to be current to the hour.

The one date on every row

The list carries a single 'as of' date for the whole file. When this site reads the list, it applies that date to every row. That means the date on a row is the date the list was published, not the date the company was licensed or the date it was added. A company may have been listed for years, but the row will still show the current 'as of' date.

This is a limit of the source. The central bank does not publish a separate date for each entry. If you need to know when a company first appeared, you would have to look at past versions of the list, which this site does not keep. The date shown tells you when the regulator last updated the whole file.

A listing is not an endorsement

A name on the list means the company has permission to exchange or transfer virtual assets for the public under the central bank's rules. It does not mean the central bank approved a strategy, a bot, a promoter or a return. A listed company's name can be borrowed by someone else, so a name match is a start and not an answer.

The reader must still ask who exactly receives the deposit, in whose name the receiving account or wallet is held, and what agreement governs the money. A bot or a promoter is never itself a listed provider, so if the pitch points to a bot's name, that name will not be found on the list.

How to use the table with a pitch

When you see an 'AI trading bot' offer, ask for the exact legal name of the company that will receive the deposit. Then look for that name in the table above. If the name is there, it is a listed virtual asset service provider. If it is not there, the company may be a bank, inactive, or not on the list at all.

Do not search for the bot's name or the channel name. Those are labels, not legal entities. The question is never 'is the bot listed?' but 'is the company that receives the money listed?' A promoter who avoids naming the company is giving you information by omission.

Confirm on the central bank's own page

The table above is a convenience, not a substitute for the regulator's page. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas publishes its directories of supervised financial institutions on its website. The reader should open that page and search for the company's name directly. That is the official record.

This site reads the list once a week, so the table can lag behind the regulator's page by several days. If a company's status changed recently, the table may not show it yet. Always treat the central bank's page as the source of truth, and use this table only as a starting point.

The table answers who is registered, not who is honest

A row in the table means the central bank has placed a company on its public list of virtual asset service providers. The list records the legal name the company used in its application, its registered status, and the date of the regulator's action. It does not record customer complaints, trading losses, or whether the company keeps its promises after onboarding. A reader looking at the table sees a registry entry, not a conduct record.

The distinction matters because a pitch often borrows the authority of a listed company while the deposit goes elsewhere. A promoter may say the bot is 'powered by' a listed entity or that the money is 'custodied with' one, but the table only shows that the named company exists on the list. It does not show that the bot's operator has any legal link to that company, or that the listed company will return funds if the strategy fails.

When a deposit goes to an account or wallet that is not in the listed company's name, the table provides no comfort. The regulator's list tells you who has permission to exchange or transfer virtual assets. It does not tell you who will answer when a withdrawal is delayed, who controls the private keys, or who is liable if the bot's code makes a bad trade. Those answers lie in contracts and receipts, not in a registry entry.

A bot's trading record cannot be verified from the table

Promoters share screenshots of profits, balance growth, and daily returns. The table on this page has no column for those numbers because the regulator does not collect them. A virtual asset service provider is listed for its activity—exchange, transfer, custody—not for the performance of any software that runs on top of it. The bot's claimed results are outside the data the central bank publishes.

This means a promoter can point to a listed company and still show fabricated or cherry-picked results. The listing does not make the screenshots real, and the screenshots do not make the listing relevant. A reader who checks the company name on the central bank's page learns only that the company is on the list. The bot's historical returns, if any, are a separate claim that no Philippine registry verifies.

When the pitch mixes the bot's performance with the company's listing, the two get tangled. The listing is a fact about registration; the performance is a claim about the past. One is checkable on an official page, the other is not. Keeping them separate is the first step in seeing what the table can and cannot do for a reader who is deciding where to send money.

The receiving name is the one that must be on the list

A deposit can go to a bank account, an e-wallet, or a crypto wallet address. The table identifies companies by their registered legal names, not by their trade names, app names, or bot names. When a promoter gives payment details, the reader's job is to find the exact name of the account holder or wallet owner and compare it to the names in the table. A near match is not enough.

The central bank's list uses the name from the company's registration documents. A promoter might use a shortened version, a brand, or the name of a related entity. Those variations will not appear in the table. If the receiving name is not exactly the same as a name in the list, the listing provides no protection for that deposit. The mismatch itself is the finding.

In practice, the receiving name often appears only after a reader asks for payment instructions. The pitch may first show only the bot's name and a promise of returns. The deposit instructions reveal who actually receives the money. That is the moment to pause, write down the name on the account or wallet, and check it against the table before sending anything.

The central bank's list is not a customer protection scheme

The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas publishes the list of virtual asset service providers as part of its oversight of money service businesses. The list tells the public which non-bank companies have registered with the central bank for those activities. It is not a guarantee fund, an insurance scheme, or a promise that customers will get their money back if a provider fails.

A listed company is subject to the central bank's rules on anti-money laundering, operational standards, and reporting. Those rules are about the company's conduct as a provider, not about the outcome of any trading strategy. If a customer deposits funds and the bot loses them, the listing does not create a claim against the central bank. The regulator's role is to supervise the provider, not to compensate losses.

Readers sometimes treat the list as a whitelist of safe places to send money. That is a misreading. The central bank itself states that inclusion on the list does not constitute endorsement. The list is a starting point for checking that a company exists in the regulator's records. It is not a substitute for reading terms, understanding fees, and deciding whether the risk is acceptable.

The deposit question has to be asked in writing

A promoter who will not name the receiving company in a chat message or email is giving you a reason to stop. Voice notes, live videos, and disappearing messages are not a record you can show later. Ask for the exact legal name of the company that will receive your deposit, and ask for it in a form you can save. If the answer is only a brand, a bot name, or a first name, the money trail is already broken.

The written answer matters because it fixes the story at a moment in time. Screenshots of a Telegram or Facebook conversation preserve what was said before any money moved. If the deposit goes missing or withdrawals stall, that record is what you bring to a bank, an e-wallet provider, or a regulator. Without a written answer, the promoter can later claim you misunderstood.

A common workaround is to send a screenshot of a wallet address and say the money goes there. That is not an answer to the question. A wallet address is not a company, and it does not tell you who controls the keys. The question is not where the crypto lands, but which registered entity is accountable for it. Insist on the legal name of that entity.